Dilnot's Review: will it spark the introduction of a social care 'quality criteria' ?

I was recently interviewed by www.careindustrynews.co.uk about the ‘state of the care industry’ and it got me thinking just how few incentives there are for the poor stock that is dragging the industry into further dismay, to buck-up their ideas to provide better care.

If we’re talking ways to save millions of government money that the sector is so desperate for; a scheme whereby funds are awarded based on a ‘quality criteria’ is something I'd like to see introduced after Dilnot's Review.

Andrew Dilnot has my full support in his attempt to drive change for the sector. I urge that ministers don’t drag their feet and action change before even more people are scared witless, are drained of their finances and ultimately are given the care that they deserve.

Here’s an excerpt of my interview regarding the ‘quality criteria’ that I'd like brought in:

The subject of contributed costs towards care paid by local authorities is something that Ideal Care Homes has very strong opinions about. Their policy of no top-up fees requires them to work diligently with the money they do receive from councils, but on what Lawrence interprets as an unfair system. “Some local authorities are more forward thinking than others and will reward quality. I don’t mind getting £400 a week from a council to fund an elderly resident’s care, but what I disagree with is the care home down the road getting the same amount when their facilities are not as good, their staff are not NVQ level 2 trained, they don’t have lifts etc. Pay them £200 per week, put them out of business if you have to, but pay them a base fee that incentivises them to increase their quality.

“If you look at Southern Cross, what was their incentive to increase the quality in their homes? There was none, other than to get more private clients. As most of their clients are local authority funded, there’s no incentive to train the staff better, to better the facilities. Why would you want to do that when you’re struggling on the fees you get? We’ve taken the view that what should come out of this is the government should look at it and say ‘there’s a base fee of £400’ or whatever the number is. ‘You get additional money for en-suite rooms, additional for a NVQ level 2 qualified staff etc’. So the local authorities are promoting good quality care or at least incentivising people to improve the level of accommodation.”

He also believes that the austerity measures currently in place across the country will force councils to focus on how much they are paying for care in their own facilities. “Authorities can’t justify paying what is sometimes three or four times as much money for what is relatively sub-standard accommodation. In Leeds we provide residential care for round about £465 a week with no top up fees. We believe that the cost to look after a client in a local authority home is a minimum of £700. We need to have better quality private accommodation so that the local authorities can use it. The councils are not then funding homes that are half empty. Instead, that risk is passed to me, the operator, again incentivising me to offer the highest standards so that the home is always full.”